Yelp Star Rating Data

raina0941 Comment

Based on Yelp’s top 100 Must-eat Restaurants in the United States (based on ratings and number of reviews), Da Poke Shack in Hawaii stands in the number one slot. It is important to note these curated lists are subjective; however, with over a thousand different reviews, it is safe to say that Yelp can hold some sort of credibility with the quality of this restaurant.

Immediately when a user navigates to a restaurants page, Yelp provides its user with evident key information about the restaurant in hand. Name, number of reviews, price range, and style of cuisine are all clearly stated. However, the most prominent information that Yelp provides is the restaurants star rating that is depicted in bright orange and white.

Da Poke Shack has an impressive 4.5 stars from 1203 reviews. This is a great achievement as the probability of variance is greater when dealing with a large sample size of people. Nonetheless, Yelp provides users with star rating details, and when taking a closer look, I found that that more than 73% of the reviewers gave Da Poke Shake a 5 star rating. That’s insane! For their to be that much certainty from subjective reviews gives the rating even more integrity. There are those few individuals that have given Da Poke Shack a very poor rating of 1 or 2 stars. What would call for such opposite reviews of the same restaurant?

One cause of variance is the demographic of reviewers. Yelp provides information on reviewers and categorizers them by Age, Education, and Income. All are major categories that effect a reviewers subjective opinions of a restaurant and their experience. Therefore; demographic is a large factor that needs to be further explored to understand the credibility of Yelp and its ratings.

 

Yelp Star Rating Data

Magazine Article – Evolving The Classroom

David TadrosLeave a comment

Picture this.

You’re registering for classes for the next semester and come across a course titled, “Serious Games.” On the one hand, the idea of learning using video games in a classroom is intriguing, but based on past experiences, the expectation is a traditional classroom setting with rows of seats, bored and unengaged students with a professor at the front of the room speaking to the class about what makes certain games so “serious.”

The building where the course is held, unlike the usual college campus buildings, is off to the side in a small retrofitted house the university purchased for additional classroom space.

“Am I in the right space?” you ask yourself as you notice the classroom is a fairly large room with three center tables with chairs surrounding them, much like the imagery of jury deliberation rooms in movies.

On each table is the same board game, “Bang!” a roll-the-dice game based on Hollywood’s old American westerns.

“It was unlike any classroom experience I’ve had thus far. I thought the class was going to be a social discussion and analyses of games, but I never imagined we’d spend the class period every week actually playing the games we were discussing,” Kyle Addeo, an undergraduate student at Rutgers University, said. “I learned so much about myself, my classmates, and the ideas that board games subconsciously implant in us and bring out of us. When you’re dealing with racism, classism, poverty and stereotypes, the subject matters can be pretty intimidating, especially if you feel as though you aren’t a participant. But you realize that these games mask these issues so well, that you don’t even realize the issues are embedded in the game design. After you play some of these games professor Trammell had on the syllabus, you realize the pattern behind your own thoughts and think, “wow, why did I think that, or why did I not realize the game was designed this way before?” It’s such a compelling class.”

How can games provoke such in-depth emotions and learning experiences? They are just forms of entertainment, right?

“I’ve never been in a class where I was excited to come in and do the work every week,” Thomas Park, an undergraduate student at Rutgers University, said. “My classmates weren’t just guys and girls I see in class and recognize around campus, they were people that I grew to understand and really know. It was surreal in away. I never had a classroom experiences quite like that. The games didn’t only act as a form of entertainment, but they were a discussion and talking points .   You really open up and show yourself more to the people around you when you’re playing a game that you enjoy. We were laughing, joking and really getting to know each other, which made the discussions all the more interesting. Instead of voicing our opinions in hopes that we hit upon what the professor wanted, we started bouncing our ideas off of one another. Everyone was really engaged in the conversation and encouraged to say what ever was on their mind.”

For the past three decades, millions of children have grown up playing games, from board games to video games to the more recent cellphone games, the gaming phenomenon has grown so fast that it rivals Hollywood, but are games only good for entertaining?

Games at their most basic form are at the epicenter of all early childhood knowledge while adding an additional and crucial element, interaction with others.

Researchers out of one of the leading institutions in the nation on the topic of games in education, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, believe that classrooms are perfect environments to evolve with games and they say that it’s not a question of if games will be implemented in the classroom, but a matter of how.

Recently, President Obama endorsed a Science, Technology, Engineering and Math education initiative to develop video games for educational purposes under the name, Serious Games.

The Serious Games initiative was created to train and educate players through games designed around problem solving, simulations or using real-world events.

These same games can still be entertaining, and arguably the more intriguing and captivating games fall out of the education category as compelling stand alone gaming experiences.

Dr. Aaron Trammell a rovost’s Postdoctoral Scholar for Faculty Diversity in Informatics and Digital Knowledge at the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism at the University of Southern California, believes that games can be more than just entertaining past-times, but can bring people together, help individuals learn more about themselves, and possibly change the world.

Through a course sharing the same name as the STEM initiative, Serious Games, Trammell showcased his own take on what Serious Games is about and used board games as a teaching tool to provide discussion and analyses on social issues the games presented.

“We used my definition of Serious Games in the classroom, which is a way of getting you to think of games critically,” Trammell said.

“The actual discussion of Serious Games is games in education. How could we use games to educate people? What is built into games commercially and what ways can we add educational elements to these games and subtract commercial elements to have a conversation around games?”

Trammell feels that video games can encourage an entirely different level of learning where students are more engaged and retain information easier from that deeper level of engagement.

He also feels that games are very effective teaching tool for a variety of subject matters.

“We can use games and develop specific games to help encourage learning,” Trammell said.

“One of the primal things about the theory of play is that you do two things when you play,” Trammell said. “One you learn how to assimilate things; you take things on and you repeat things.  The other thing you learn is how to associate things.  Which is that, not only do you learn to repeat things, but you learn to do these things that you repeat and stand in opposition to other things, and in difference to other things in the world.  So that’s kind of like the theory around games and where it comes into learning.  I definitely think they (games) have a big impact on the classroom.  In my classroom I don’t necessarily use games to teach specific skills, but how we can use these games as catalysts for conversation, not only around what a game does but also around cultural topics and the places where these games are embedded into our culture.  The sort of stuff I teach about games is the sort of stuff you would find in English courses, but I don’t think that most students today read books like they did for most English courses the way that they were designed.  I feel like games give that same experience of reading a book and understanding a story, but have a more engaged participatory audience.”

It’s easy to overlook the amount of text presented in most video games and the idea that, for some, the game dialogue and text acts as a learning tool to teach the player the English language.

Understanding this reality is part of Trammell’s argument for Serious Games.

“I think another reason for why games are really effective in the classroom is that they speak to where people are right now,” Trammell said.

“Games are really hitting on a core part of an interactive era. You have an option to make decisions and you have the option to have a different experience than other people,” Trammell said. “When I was learning how to read, I learned through playing a computer game called King’s Quest. The game was a text based adventure game where you would type in your commands as you move through the world, and read the paragraph that came based on your decisions. That form of interaction was part of the reading experience for me, and I don’t think it’s a mistake. One of the mistakes people broadly make about culture is that it’s static. That we always will and always have read in a certain kind of way, and that reading is to be elevated over other forms of knowledge. I prefer a model that sees culture as more dynamic and that recognizes that for a generation raised on computers and games that this is the sort of media that we are going to consume. That’s going to be the kind of stuff that really speaks to the grain of the quality of life that we live in and that’s going to be the sort of stuff that our life experiences are going to be based around.”

As a lecturer for several years, Trammell teaches and studies the social effects of games and play and believes games need to be considered in the classroom not only as a learning tool, but also as a way to point out and break down different cultural barriers and stereotypes.

He uses games to bring out certain experiences that many classrooms are just not equipped or ready to have.

“If a professor walked into a room and we were all playing a Wii U, they may ask, “are you guys doing work or are you just playing?” but if every classroom at the school had a Wii U in the classroom, the question wouldn’t necessary come up because every professor would know that that is part of how we learn today,” Trammell said.

Trammell spoke about several issues that arose while constructing his course curriculum and said that there are some challenges to using games for a social and analytical course as, much like other forms of art, games create a space where each individual coming to the game leaves with a different experience.

“Outside of constructing the curriculum, the most difficult aspect of teaching a class like this, is listening to every student,” Trammell said. “It’s very easy to get lost in the action of the game and not the space of the players. A really important thing for me to do is to listen to what everyone is saying while they are playing the games and it’s a difficult skill to master. Understanding how each student felt about the game in the moment drastically changed the course of the conversations we had following the end of the game. It’s the kind of thing that’s unpredictable about games and if you’re going to use them in the classroom, as an educator you need to be prepared to receive various viewpoints and know how to react accordingly.“

The professor also mentioned the stigma he dealt with as a games educator teaching in an environment that was not equipped for utilizing games in the classroom.

There was a sense of deconstructing the traditional classroom that at times gave him an uncomfortable feeling.

“In terms of constructing the curriculum, I was worried my colleagues would think I was crazy, or we’d make too much noise, or more importantly, the possibility of breaking the space from it’s intended use,” Trammell said. “It’s like teaching a punk rock class and having every student pick up a guitar. While it may be profound for the students, it may disturb neighboring courses. But what is very scary is, games are like living things. You don’t know what’s going to emerge while you’re playing a game. The less structured on gamification it is, the more crazy things tend to occur. We used board games in class, and I honestly don’t know how you would attempt to teach utilizing video games in a classroom the way the traditional classroom is structured, and that’s a big obstacle for digital Serious Games. Most classrooms aren’t equipped with the necessary operettas for people to play digital games in the class, and most video games aren’t designed for an entire class they are usually designed for one person. Something has to change if Serious Games are going to work in the classroom. We would need the classroom to change, or we would need developers to adapt their game for the traditional classroom. What a school is, it’s not a play space and most classrooms aren’t ready to be a play space and it’s a big barrier for educators to take games seriously in classroom.”

Speaking of gamification, many times educators would take what some may call, an easy way out by incorporating game elements to their classroom instead of taking the plunge to teach using games themselves.

The incorporation of creating a points system where the player, or student in this case, is rewarded or penalized based on their actions, is known as the most basic form of gamification.

Trammell criticized gamification as a inaccurate dumbed down form of play, Fanny Ramirez, a doctoral student and part time lecturer at Rutgers University who’s research is focused on the social aspects of video games, shared similar opinions on games in education and gamification.

“When a lot of people think of gamification, they just take the basic elements of a game like the scoring system, the ranking system, points and badges, but that’s really just the surface of games, “ Ramirez said. “Games go so much deeper than that. All the meaningful lessons you can get from really investing in a game are lost when you’re just reduced to a system of scores and points. That’s why gamification fails in the classroom because it’s essentially ranking students against each other for no particular reason. There is no learning happening and no group experience. It’s just this really cut and dry most basic form of games. It diminishes the power of games by saying, “it’s just a system of points. It’s just ranking students.” Games can be so much more than that.”

Trammell and Ramirez were not the only ones to criticize gamification in the classroom. Nadav Lipkin, Ph. D student in Rutgers School of Communications and Information, shared similar thoughts.

“Even the word gamification itself is really gross,” Lipkin said.   “It’s a horrible term. It teaches people to play that game and doesn’t teach them anything else. As soon as you attach these consequences, you’ve lost the point. Say a flight simulator works with gaming systems. If you then apply these point aspects to someone’s job or to their homework, there’s a higher risk involved. You don’t have any room to experiment when it’s your job. If you do badly in your job, you run the risk of getting fired. If you lose points in your class, you may fail the class. If you fail in a flight simulator there’s nothing to lose so you have that freedom of experimenting and trying new things. You’re not constantly being threatened by the negative consequences of failure.”

Aside from using games to dictate the entire syllabus, Ramirez spoke of using games as icebreakers to get students acquainted with one another and more comfortable analyzing each other’s work or even building off of each other’s ideas.

“Another way to look at games in the classroom is to look at cooperative games,” Rameriz said. “Some board games you need to play together. You either win as a group or you lose as a group. Putting students together in these types of situations really gets them thinking. Instead of pitting them against each other, they are working together to come up with a solution for the problem. By putting students in these situations they are more engaged than the traditional classroom where the professor is standing in the front of the room and talking at them instead of speaking with them. You also see bonds forming that many times become lasting bonds that will continue to exist outside the classroom. We are in a time where students don’t even speak to each other anymore and everyone is on their cellphone. Games have this very powerful social component to them that bring people together, and give people something to talk about.”

While games have proven to be a viable learning tool, Lipkin, Ramirez and Trammell all agreed that video games in the classroom is a difficult endeavor to accomplish due to misconceptions of video games in the media and by educators in general.

“Much of the research citied on the correlation between video games and violent tendencies in children are outdated,” Lipkin said. “Most of the studies were from early beginnings of video games and those studies haven’t really been updated since the early 80s. Three decades later, the media is still using the same studies, and that scares educators and parents. If games were to be incorporated in every classroom, the benefits would be tremendous, but the obstacles that need to be overcome before than becomes a reality are immense.”

It’s likely that within our lifetime, video games will become a crucial part to our educational system, especially considering that many of the next generation of teachers and professors would have grown up playing games. Wars are fought and won using games for strategies and some of the oldest games in history are based on strategic thinking. Taking all this into consideration, as well as the research found on the benefits of games in the classroom, it may be somewhat surprising if your kids bring home an Xbox game disc as their homework, but it may be less surprising if their class started meeting in a virtual world out of your living room computer.

Magazine Article – Evolving The Classroom

DCIM Capstone Research – Evolving the Classroom: Games as the Future of Education

David TadrosLeave a comment

 

Personal Site Link

Evolving the Classroom: Games as the Future of Education

 

ABSTRACT

            The purpose of this paper is to show the key findings of using games, such as video games, board games and puzzles, as a learning tool for educational purposes by pointing to research in areas of childhood learning, the Serious Games initiative, how games in educational settings have and have not worked thus far, and the future of games as educational tools. This paper argues in favor of the idea of a future for video games in the classroom as the future for generations of children brought up on video games and digital media Utilizing data from researchers from various higher educational institutes such as, the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Wilfrid Laurier University as well as interviews with graduate students from Rutgers University and a former Rutgers lecturer and games scholar, the research indicates a common thread. The results of the research and interviews points to a question that is repeated constantly throughout the data collection; it’s not if games are integrated into the classroom, it’s how? Games will be a crucial part of the learning experience and open the door to a wealth of possibilities, but only if educators and institutions are willing to take the plunge.

 

INTRODUCTION

For years millions of children have grown up playing games, from board games to video games to the more recent cellphone games, the gaming phenomenon has grown so fast that it rivals Hollywood, but are games only good for entertaining? Research shows learning occurs in three stages, the first stage being play. Games at their most basic form are at the epicenter of all early childhood knowledge while arguably adding an additional and crucial element, interaction with others. Some researchers believe that classrooms are perfect environments to evolve with games, and they say that it’s not a question of if games will be implemented in the classroom, but a matter of how? Recently, President Obama endorsed a Science, Technology, Engineering and Math education initiative to develop video games for educational purposes under the name, Serious Games.   The Serious Games initiative was created to train and educate players through games designed around problem solving, simulations or using real-world events. These same games can still be entertaining, and arguably the more intriguing and captivating games fall out of the education category as compelling stand alone gaming experiences.

 

LITERATURE REVIEW

How Children Learn –

            Before one can understand the concept of video games in education, the first area to explore is how children learn through play. The concept of learning through play is not a new concept, and has actually been used and explored by sociologists and anthropologists. (Annetta, 2008, p. 231-234) Children utilize play to experiment with the world around them in three main stages, the initial play stage, learning through play, and finally practice, or how to associate what they learned with the world. (Annetta, 2008, p. 231-234) According to Annetta (2008), “Play systematically confronts the child with learning situations that could only be located within his or her area of close development… Learning to play is learning to master situations marked metacommunication.” (p. 232). Considering children are literally growing up with video games, computers and other digital media, it’s a safe assumption that the way in which learning, understanding and comprehension are all effected by digital culture. Squire (2005). At the core of play, games hit help in the learning space by providing a way to assimilate, repeat, learn from the repetition, and associate what was learned with other things in the world. (Trammell, 2015).

Serious Games –

            Serious Games is a government-funded initiative started in 2003 that focuses on the research of games as an educational tool. The program also promotes the development of educational an edutainment style games to meet the needs of the “Net generation.” (Annetta, 2008, p. 229 – 230). Serious Games can also serve outside of education in various fields from healthcare to defense areas. One of the defining aspects of Serious Games is the fact that entertainment takes a back seat, while the aspects of teaching and instructing the player are streamlined and fleshed out. (Djaouti, Alvarez and Jessel). Basically, in it’s simplest form; Serious Games is just what it sounds like, games with a serious subject matter, tone and purpose.

The topic of Serious Games has also branched out into course curriculums centered on studying games for their social impact and underlying meaning. (Trammell, 2015). The inspiration for this research project was actually the Serious Games course taught at Rutgers University, which took an in-depth look at board games and created a discussion form for students to react, not only to how the games played, but deeper issues surrounding the games from social stereotypes to poverty. (Trammell, 2015).

Obstacles and What Has NOT Worked –

Whiles Games have been utilized as teaching tools for centuries, there have always been issues and areas that worked and haven’t worked. Here we will briefly describe some challenges video games face today, such as misconceptions, traditional classroom limitations and gamification.

            Misconceptions

                        Arguably one of the major obstacles that educators need to overcome to allow video games to to become a prominent part of the classroom is the negative stigma surrounding video games and the digital culture. There’s a misconception that video games lead to multiple complications in early childhood development as well as violent behaviors based on studies that are decades out of date. Squire (2005). These misconceptions include violent and aggressive behavior, an implementation of gender stereotypes, the promotion of unhealthy attitudes, and stifle creative play. Squire (2005). According to Squire (2005) due to the outdated nature of most research around video games, and as a result of recently conducted surveys, “research on video game violence has failed to show that video games cause violent, anti-social, or aggressive behavior or poor school performance.”

Possibly a contributing aspect for educators to accurately convey benefits of games is to cite the extensive cognitive, kinesthetic, and strategic thinking skills that video game play provides. (Boyan and Sherry, 2011). While some may think game play is mindless entertainment, Boyan and Sherry argue that video game play improves hand-eye coordination, providing strategic thinking through various video game negotiating skills and quicker reaction and decision making times, as well as improved mental rotation abilities. (Boyan and Sherry, 2011).

Breaking the Traditional Classroom Space

                        Another major obstacle educators face is how the traditional classroom is currently designed. With educators at the front of the room speaking to students, the classroom environment does not promote an engaging atmosphere that encourages conversation. (Trammell, 2015) Classroom spaces are also usually not set up as a play space and are ill equipped, lacking gaming consoles, computers and other apparatuses needed to hold video games in the classroom. (Trammell, 2015). There is also the lack of association with play and learning that educators would need to overcome. According to Trammell (2015), “If a professor walked into a room and we were all playing a Wii U, they may ask, “are you guys doing work or are you just playing?” but if every classroom at the school had a Wii U in the classroom, the question wouldn’t necessary come up because every professor would know that that is part of how we learn today,” (Trammell, 2015). Not only does this example align with the idea of ill equipped classrooms, but it also plays into the stigma that games are not learning tools.

            Gamification –

                        Arguably one of the easiest and most dumbed down tactics for implementing games into a course curriculum is gamification. According to Hamari, Koivsto and Sarsa, gamification is, “a process of embracing services with (motivational) affordances in order to invoke gameful experiences and further behavioral outcomes.” (Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. 2014, p. 3) The basis of gamification is incorporating basic elements of video games such as scoring systems, ranking systems, points, achievements and badges. (Ramirez, 2015).

The issue with gamification is that it overlooks the purpose of games as an art form, educational tool and entertainment devices. By taking the most basic forms of games and applying them to different areas in life, researchers believe the basic uses of gamification, such as experimentation and trial and error, are lost due to the possible ramifications of scoring low. (Lipkin, 2015).

Still, others argue that there are positive ways of implementing gamification that is not harmful to students. Nicholson believes there are two types of gamification; reward-based gamification and meaningful gamification. If the gamification backs up intrinsic motivations, Nicholson believes that, if utilized correctly, subjects can see some benefits to rewards based system and argues that most subjects fully accept rewards based systems. Nicholson argues that gamification most easily works for short-term changes and goals by providing reward based outcomes, but for long term change, there must be a balanced combination gamification elements that Nicholson calls, the “recipe for meaningful gamification.” This “recipe calls for developers to combine interesting gameplay elements with motivations and activities that affect the real world, provide choices to players in regards to activities, provide information feedback, keep players engaged toward the goal and provide a sense of reflection. (Nicholson, 2015, p. 3-12 and Nicholson, 2013)

While Nicholson argues that there are opportunities to provide players with meaningful gamification, Ramirez, Lipkin and Trammell argue that teachers, as untrained developers, tend to lean on utilizing short term methods in long term situations resulting in constant failed attempts at utilizing gamification for it’s intended purpose. (Ramirez, 2015; Lipkin, 2015; Trammell, 2015)

What Has Worked –

            There have been a number of instances where games have been documented as assisting students with basic English and reading comprehension skills. Games that were not designed with educational purposes in mind, served as a learning tool arguably as much as a traditional form of literature would in a basic English 101 course. (Trammell, 2015)

Non-educational games have even been centered in areas of social reflection. Professor Abbott of Wabash College utilized the game Portal to assist in teaching his course “Enduring Questions.” The course focuses around reflections on what makes us human. The professor utilized the narrative of Portal to successfully provide extensive discussion points for his students to reflect on while also allowing students who never played video games to think in terms of 3D spaces and what they are capable of accomplishing. Abbott pointed out that many students in his course we not aware that video games were capable of conveying compelling stories. (Klepek, 2011)

Call of Duty, one of the biggest AAA commercial games of this generation, has shown much promise in teaching students differently situations that the traditional classroom cannot immerse students in. Tannahill, Tissington and Senior said that Call of Duty provides gamers with motivating war simulators that stimulate the brain and releasing dopamine in the ventral striatum, a section of the brain that networks thought patterns. The game also provides a learning environment in which it provides constant feedback to the player and an environment that encourages learning through failures. (Tannahill, Tissington and Senior, 2012)

At Rutgers University, students in the Digital Communication, Information and Media curriculum are given the opportunity to utilize the virtual play space of Second Life to, not only provide students a way of exploring different cultures within a virtual world, but provides students a virtual extension of the classroom. Professors are able to utilize this play space to conduct classes without needing a dedicated classroom space on campus. Students were also encouraged to work together to navigate, manipulate and study the virtual world.

A virtual world called, “The Wolf Den” was created at North Carolina State University, and served for the collages distance learning and a video game creation tool for educators. Courses are taught in this environment in real time and students are encouraged to facilitate and direct the design of the environment. The application utilizes voice over Internet protocols to help students and professors communicate in the world. The game not only allows students to manipulate the world, but also interact with it as it allows students in the distance learning program to do things that students would normally need to be present at the University to do, such as analyzing and testing water samples in a laboratory setting in the virtual world. (Annetta, 2008, p. 234)

“Mad City Mystery” is an RPG (role-playing game) that takes place on the campus of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The game uses a mystery story line of a friend drowning in the real life Lake Mendota. The game utilizes GPS technology to create a fictional layer while placing the game in a real-world environment. Squire says, “The game is designed to leverage five specific features that are common in role playing games, specifically, embedded and cascading challenges, differentiated roles, embedded narrative resources, connections to space and place, and emergent collaboration and competition.” (Squire, 2008, p. 21) The game is designed to provide students with engulfing experiences that bridges the virtual world and reality in an immersive experience the classroom can not provide. The students that gained the most from the game were students with a history of poor school performance who also had learning difficulties, particularly in concentration. The game served as a way of getting the students to enjoy being in school as well as provide opportunities for critical thinking and problem solving situations. (Squire, 2008, p. 21 – 23)

There are also a plethora of other examples of video games in educational settings. The military utilizes game simulations for combat and negotiation simulations. Hospitals utilize game simulations for training purposes, and there are countless video games created specifically for the classroom, but arguably fail due to an imbalance of emergence and a disconnect on subject matters.

The Future of Games in Education –

            Gee, Halverson, Shaffer, and Squire (2005) state, video games will enter the classroom, and it’s not a matter of when, it’s a matter of how. They argue that currently, classrooms utilize virtual worlds, but predict that the utilization of virtual worlds will go further with the development of simulators. The issue that they state will be the biggest obstacle is the development phase. Gee, Halverson, Shaffer, and Squire question who will take gaming to that level and predict that early stages may rely on the military to develop combat simulations that may be the basis and lead to the adaption for classrooms. (Gee, Halverson, Shaffer, and Squire, 2005)

Other researchers agree that virtual worlds will continue to develop and consume the classroom space as the classroom of the future. Aldrich (2009) believes that virtual worlds, games and simulations are all different with each one serving it’s own purpose, and each having the ability to serve in an educational setting. Aldrich and Annetta both believe in HIVE (Highly Interactive Virtual Environments) Aldrich (2009) or HI FIVES (Highly Interactive Fun Internet Virtual Environments in Science) (Annetta, 2008, p. 235-234) models of game design that are lending to the future of video games in education. Aldrich (2009) states that the idea of HIVE learning shares similarities to learning how to swim as it provides students the opportunity to play, experiment and practice in a new environment that has it’s own set of rules and uses. As previously stated, the idea of distance learning is brought through utilizing HIVE to allow students who otherwise would not be able to be physically present in a traditional classroom, to still participate as much as other students who live on campus. (Aldrich, 2009)

While it’s possible that gaming will enter the classroom through traditional consoles, Trammell (2015) argues that classrooms would need to begin adapting to home console trends, which is more difficult than equipping classrooms with computers as computers serve multiple purposes. (Trammel, 2015).

Home consoles are usually updated in anywhere from five to ten years after launch, which would also pose a difficulty to colleges attempting to adapt games as teaching tools. Most research points to virtual worlds for all the aforementioned points, but in a more practical sense, installing these applications on a computer in a classroom seems the most economic way to integrate.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

What are the benefits of using video games in the classroom?  How have video games penetrated the traditional classroom space?  What predictions do researchers and scholars have for how games will be incoperated in the classroom in the future?

DATA COLLECTION

            Data collection consisted of scholarly article collection utilizing Wikipedia’s reference section, Google Scholar and Rutgers University’s online library. At first, some key words were, simply “games” and “education,” but as my research continued, the keywords expanded. During my data collection, it was somewhat difficult to find many research articles on games in education, at first most of the data was on if games were dangerous or not. The second form of data collection, which ultimately lead to a wealth of articles, was interviewing professors and grad students who have studied games. Through these interviews, not only did I gain more data on the topic, but I was also directed to studies such as Scott Nicholson and the University of Wisconsin-Madison. From there, data collection became easier as I was able to look in the bibliography sections of those articles and then search for more pinpointed terms like “gamification,” “learning systems,” and “teaching with games.”   I also ended up utilizing social media platforms like YouTube for video content and watching speeches conducted by some of the researchers to better understand their position on the topic.

RESULTS

            In comparison to movies, music and literature, video games are a relatively young art form surrounded by many misconceptions based on outdated research that negatively impacts their ability to penetrate the traditional classroom. Slowly games have been transforming the classroom into a play space, or converting play spaces into classroom extensions, be it purposely or through the games design. There have been countless instances of video games penetrating the classroom serving to provide meaningful forms of discussion, reflection and training be it through educational based games or traditional consumer targeted games.

While there is an endless supply of research articles that cite similar studies to prove games negatively effect players, the emerging research lead by the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the Serious Games imitative prove that games not only serve entertainment purposes, but provide a compelling argument for how the classroom space will transform in the near future. The benefits really provide a strong agreement for games in the classroom, such as the low development costs, less physical space and weight for students by eliminating text books, providing an interactive and engaging experience for students who may be distance or online students, and the fact that games hit on many skills while driving the basic stages of learning through play. Video games in the classroom, or the virtual play space of games being the classroom, seems like the logical evolution and progression of education.   The articles and interviews conducted, unfortunately are not able to predict the future, but the results of my research do paint a detailed picture and provides a strong prediction that games will take over the classroom be it through console games, board games, or the more likely scenario of virtual worlds and utilizing recent developments in virtual reality.

It’s too early to place bets on how games will be implemented in the classroom, but the data to support the benefits in a classroom environment is there. As Gee, Halverson, Shaffer, and Squire stated, it’s not when it’s how?

           

CONCLUSION

While most of the research points to video games being the future of many educational curriculums, and as games are currently being used in the classroom, it’s difficult to firmly state that video games will definitely work their way into every course curriculum, especially with the countless misconceptions standing as obstacles for educators who do see games as the future.  The Serious Games imitative has While there is data to provide a compelling argument, the only sure way to determine what will happen is to wait and see.

 

 

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aldrich, Carl (2009) “Virtual Worlds, Simulations, and Games for Education: A Unifying           View ,” Innovate: Journal of Online Education: Vol. 5: Iss. 5, Article 1. Retrieved     September 13, 2015 

Annetta, Leonard A. (2008) “Video Games in Education: Why They Should Be Used and How   They Are Being Used”. Retrieved September 13, 2015.

Boyan, Andy; Sherry, John L. (May 2011) “The Challenge in Creating Games for Education:      Aligning Mental Models With Game Models” Retrieved September 13, 2015

Djaouti, Damien; Alvarez, Julian; Jessel, Jean-Pierre. “Classifying Serious Games: the G/P/S model” Univiersty of Toulouse, France. Retrieved December 1, 2015

Gee, James P.; Halverson, Richard; Shaffer, David W.; Squire, Kurt R. (June 2005) “Video      Games and the Future of Learning” University of Wisconsin–Madison.  Retrieved       October 22, 2015 

Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). “Does Gamification Work? – A Literature Review

            of Empirical Studies on Gamification.” In proceedings of the 47th Hawaii

            International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, USA, January 6-9, 2014.

            Retrieved December 1, 2015.

Klepek, Patrick (2011) “Intro to GLaDOS 101: A Professor’s Decision to Teach Portal” San       Francisco, CA.  Retrieved September 15, 2015. 

Lipkin, Nadav (2015), personal communication, November 15th, 2015

Nicholson, Scott (2015) “A RECIPE for Meaningful Gamification.” Gamification in Education

and Business, New York: Springer. Retrieved December 1, 2015.

Nicholson, Scott (December 12, 2013) “Meaningful Gamification: Motivating Through Play    Instead of Manipulating” MIT Labs.  YouTube Video.  Retrieved October 11, 2015 

Ramirez, Fanny (2015), personal communication, November 15th, 2015

Tannahill, Nick; Tissington, Patrick; Senior, Carl (June 25, 2012) “Video Games and Higher    Education: What Can “Call of Duty” Teach Our Students?“.  Retrieved October 1, 2015

Trammel, Aaron (2015), personal communication, September 20th, 2015

Squire, Kurt D (2005) “Video Games in Education” Retrieved October 22, 2015

Squire, Kurt D. (2008) “Video Games and Education: Designing Learning Systems for an          Interactive Age” Retrieved October 21, 2015 

DCIM Capstone Research – Evolving the Classroom: Games as the Future of Education